Allahabad High Court
CRLP/18812/2026 of RAMGOLA @ RAM GOLE AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS on 7 September 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 18812 of 2026 Court No. - 48 HON'BLE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J. HON'BLE TARUN SAXENA, J. 1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following main prayers:- "I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 18812 of 2026
Court No. - 48
HON'BLE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J.
HON'BLE TARUN SAXENA, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following main prayers:- "I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the F.I.R. dated 20.07.2026 (Annexure No.1) in Case Crime No. 0330 of 2026, under Sections 8, 20, 29, 60 NDPS Act, Police Station Malpura, District Agra.
II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to arrest and harass the petitioners on the basis of impugned F.I.R. dated 20.07.2026 (Annexure No.1) in Case Crime No. 0330 of 2026, under Sections 8, 20, 29, 60 NDPS Act, Police Station Malpura, District Agra."
2. After some length of arguments, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners made an innocuous prayer that he may be permitted to withdraw the instant writ petition with liberty to avail the appropriate remedy available under the law before the appropriate Court as advised.
3. Learned AGA appearing on behalf of the State-respondents vehemently opposed the instant writ petition but has no objection on innocuous prayer made by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.
4. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. Raghuvir Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.4 as well as Mr. K.P. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Manish Kumar Kashyap, Virendra Pal Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Ramgola @ Ram Gole And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s)
Pathak, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State-respondents and perused the material available on record.
5. Since, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has not pressed the instant writ petition on merits, only made innocuous prayer to avail appropriate alternative remedy as advised, we are inclined to allow the innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner.
6. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed. September 8, 2026 Atul CRLP No. 18812 of 2026 2 (Tarun Saxena,J.) (Chandra Dhari Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad